zalack

We as a society have already said that we don’t allow children to make their own decisions, so any trans-related care falls under that banner and is, like any major medical procedure, already incredibly difficult for minors to get approved for. If you feel that we should be legislating beyond the practices of the medical community and the FDC, then yes that will carry a high bar of medical knowledge I’m going to ask you to have, as you are advocating for knowing better than the field of medicine as a whole.

There are still strict medical guidelines that doctors have to follow, even on an individual level. The story I hear over and over again from trans people is “it was a nightmare getting approval for my care and it took years” not “it was super easy”.

My question will always be: why is trans care special? We already have lots of rules around medical care for children. Why does trans care need to be specifically singled out?

If you passionately believe that you should be allowed to make medical decisions for someone else instead of their doctor, that you know better than the medical community, you better fucking be able to answer the precise medical reasoning behind it.

My worldview on abortions and transitioning is easy: that’s a personal choice between an individual and their doctor. It doesn’t affect the health of anyone but the person getting the procedure so I, but anyone else, should have a say.

I don’t need in-depth medical knowledge to defend that position. If you’re position is that we should go mucking about in other people’s care, you do need to know the medical particulars for why you believe that or I’m going to judge you hard.

NVIDIA’s marketing overhypes, but their technical papers tend to be very solid. Obviously it always pays to remain skeptical but they have a good track record in this case.

Precision for what? Knowing their cron job will fire? Knowing what was wrong with the commands they sent? Neither of those are crazy precise or ambiguous statements?

The only highly precise thing that needs to happen is the alignment of the antenna but that system has been working for decades already and has been thoroughly tested.

NASA tends to be pretty straightforward when talking about risks, and if they feel like all the systems are in working order and there’s a good chance we’ll be back in contact with it, I think it’s worth talking them at their word.

Like yeah, it’s impressive they can aim an antenna that precisely, but using stars to orient an object is a very very well understood geometry problem. NASA has been using that technique at least as far back as Apollo

Lol. The knee-jerk contrarianism online really gets under my skin, especially when it’s towards experts.

Like yeah, sometimes experts are wrong or systems don’t behave as expected. But framing that as some sort of erudite insight really bugs me.

“I hope the recovery system works!” doesn’t need to be rewritten as “Mmm yes. But what these engineers haven’t considered is the possibility that they are wrong”.

This is one of those things that sounds meaningful, but can be said about literally any problem in any system. Not all knowledge requires the same level of precision for confidence.

If the engineers at NASA who are familiar with the system say this is a known error state that will be fixed the next time the system designed to correct it fires on its set schedule, there’s not a whole lot added by saying sure, but what if they’re wrong?

It’s just restating the table stakes of existence.

If you’re looking for genuine space opera, I quite enjoyed the Final Architecture series by Adrian Tchaikovsky.

Love that series but it’s not really Space Opera

It’s a remake that uses new, higher quality assets though, so isn’t an option in this case.

Counterpoint: If I was one of the people in charge of keeping it secret and Trump got elected… I would just “forget” to ever schedule that briefing.

It’s worth pointing out that reproducible builds aren’t always guaranteed if software developers aren’t specifically programming with them in mind.

imagine a program that inserts randomness during compile time for seeds. Reach build would generate a different seed even from the same source code, and would fail being diffed against the actual release.

Or maybe the developer inserts information about the build environment for debugging such as the build time and exact OS version. This would cause verification builds to differ.

Rust (the programing language) has had a long history of working towards reproducible builds for software written in the language, for instance.

It’s one of those things that sounds straightforward and then pesky reality comes and fucks up your year.

The comment was about strategy, not objective.

IMO, it’s always better to try. Worst case scenario is that nothing changes, so no worse than if you didn’t. The only sane choice in that kind of situation is to pick the one with a chance for improvement.

In my experience, giving a shit about what you’re doing has a bunch of positing knock-on affects as well. You just end up feeling better about yourself. In your specific scenario it sounds like trying would also afford you the opportunity to live a happier life, and that’s worth chasing. The world is fucked, but scientists keep saying they if we act soon it’s not so fucked they we’re past the inflection point to un-fuck it.

It’s not that strange. A timeout occurs on several servers overnight, and maybe a bunch of Lemmy instances are all run in the same timezone, so all their admins wake up around the same time and fix it.

Well it’s a timeout, so by fixing it at the same time the admins have “synchronized” when timeouts across their servers are likely to occur again since it’s tangentially related to time. They’re likely to all fail again around the same moment.

It’s kind of similar to the thundering herd where a bunch of things getting errors will synchronize their retries in a giant herd and strain the server. It’s why good clients will add exponential backoff AND jitter (a little bit of randomness to when the retry is done, not just every x^2 seconds). That way if you have a million clients, it’s less likely that all 1,000,000 of them will attempt a retry at the extract same time, because they all got an error from your server at the same time when it failed.

Edit: looked at the ticket and it’s not exactly the kind of timeout I was thinking of.

This timeout might be caused by something that’s loosely a function of time or resources usage. If it’s resource usage, because the servers are federated, those spikes might happen across servers as everything is pushing events to subscribers. So, failure gets synchronized.

Or it could just be a coincidence. We as humans like to look for patterns in random events.

Apex Legends: Been playing since Season 0 with my SO and brother and I think it’s honestly the longest I’ve ever played a single game. The gunplay just feels so good.

Tears of the Kingdom: Still working my way through it, taking my time exploring. Honestly it’s such a great game, but I have to say the resource gathering is getting a little tedious. I like the weapon durability mechanic from the angle of being forced to switch up your fighting style, but I wish there was a way to repair weapons between fights.

Sure, but that assumes this manager would be happy with generic “medical stuff” as an answer…

Right, but if you’re request for denied for something medically necessary unless you revealed it, you went anyway (because it’s necessary), and then you got fired… That feels like it shouldn’t be legal (obviously that doesn’t mean that it isn’t).

I’m not sure it would be legal if they were forced to reveal medical information.

I think better algorithms wouldn’t be a waste of developer resources. At the end of the day, the post feed algorithm is the core product, IMO.

Figuring out how to lower the weights on highly active subs is a good idea. As is ranking smaller subs’ content appropriately.

For all it’s faults, Reddit’s algorithm was pretty good. There was always a decent mix of small and large subs on my feed.

Kbin’s post ranking overall seems better than Lemmy’s and that was a major factor in me choosing it as my home base.

It’s because the producers want their counterparts spending time, energy, and perceived social capital negotiating over it rather than the things the Producers actually worry about having to give up.

IMO it’s pretty transparent, but creative people are pretty scared of AI right now so it might be a good bargaining tactic if they can get rank and file Union members to tie up the negotiatiors by reacting.